Can America Build Another Northeast Corridor?

[@UrbanDox]

Wow this video blew up quick! Honestly thank you all so much for watching and liking the video, it means the world to me! Ill try to upload once every 2 weeks since these videos take a while to make. So stick around and wait for more content! Again thank you everyone for watching. 💜💛

[@cityseby]

Cant wait to see more vids this was so spot on 👑

[@GBR9794]

the fact is we are doomed for high speed scam, thank you coming to my tedtalk.

[@michaelLaderman-pk5mn]

You asked for feedback, so here goes: First, you know your stuff, and your examples are interesting, well-chosen, and in some instances different from those mentioned by CityNerd, whom I subscribe to. However, I think you are probably overselling high-speed rail as a solution for poverty, and also, if train service is frequent but expensive, problems will remain. Also, don't suddenly yell, and if you show a graphic like "Hyperloop Texas," briefly explain what's wrong with it instead of yelling something like "NO! NOT LIKE THAT!" I looked it up, found out that it was magnetic levitation, and though: "OK, that's cool."

[@BlueBear13]

Better upload fast 💨 😅 [Edit: Although I desire that the country could catch up to the rest of the world(and more) the best thing to do is to focus on stabilizing the economy.]

[@qjtvaddict]

Fun fact the HSR network of China is mostly funded by banks.

[@stevenroshni1228]

Eliminating the need for a car once arriving in the cities is vital for the success of HSR. The Northeast Corridor has that.

[@TheNewGreenIsBlue]

Airports do that as well with rental cars. However, shared Car-sharing along corridors would be awesome.

[@nyxie_wolf]

By building more useful infrastructure around train stations like a link to local public transit in the form of bus routes light rail metros and street cars. As well as instead of dedicating big amounts of land to parking instead use it to have shops hotels and other useful things to pedestrians because nobody wants to walk through a huge concrete jungle without shade in the summer or cover from wind and rain it has to be a pleasant experience or else people will dread doing it.

[@stevenroshni1228]

@@TheNewGreenIsBlue getting a rental car is a big hassle rather than just driving five hours. (Although I guess the companies can streamline the process

[@TheNewGreenIsBlue]

And yet people who fly do it all the time.

[@strega-nil]

FWIW, the Cascades corridor absolutely has that too; Vancouver, Seattle, and Portland all have good enough transit that a car is unnecessary, while the smaller cities certainly have less good but still useable transit.

[@aphextwin5712]

In Europe one rule of thumb is that if a rail journey between two cities takes 4h or less, it can significantly reduce air travel between those cities.

[@darthmaul216]

500mi

[@starventure]

That rule is probably a bit tighter in the US due to total door to door travel time being skewed. 2 hours by rail is worth it, but if the commutation time adds to much to it, rail fails and the local airport wins. European door to door times are much shorter than in the US.

[@aphextwin5712]

@@starventure Not sure what you mean with door-to-door. Do you mean, your own door to the train station/train?

[@danielbum912]

I can imagine what they mean is that rail usually drops you off in the city center, which is great in Europe where it reduces travel time because most destinations are there or relatively close to that, but US city centers are a mix of surface level parking and office sky scrapers and unless your destination is either of those you still have a significant distance to reach the sprawled suburbs where everything is.

[@Joesolo13]

@@darthmaul216 Distance is part of the math for sure, but the travel time is the real question. If there's a mountain range in between 2 cites it'll take longer (unless relevant officials give a shit and tunnel directly).

[@roblywobly]

Good video! Always nice to see the algorithm promote a smaller channel. Another promising idea is to run from Philly through Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and end in Chicago. Connecting the rust belt to the Northeast Corridor and adding the requisite industrial expertise in rail maintenance and operation would probably do a great deal to revitalize the once industrial region!

[@aaronorel3254]

So basically the Capitol Limited but faster and more frequent? I know that goes from DC, so perhaps it could be connected to the Keystone line in some way

[@roblywobly]

@@aaronorel3254 That line is also very much worth speeding up, but a lot of the rail between Pittsburgh and DC is on freight lines that wind through the Appalachians. But Philadelphia to Harrisburg in Pennsylvania already has the electrified Keystone service at 110mph, so it seems to me the easiest way to get fast rail service through to the midwest. Bystander opinion here though so take it with a grain of salt lol

[@realdlmurray]

​@@aaronorel3254Amtrak Pennsylvanian

[@nicholasraymond4811]

Another more niche possibility would be along Colorado's front range from north to south. Colorado has an Amtrak that goes east and west, but no trains that connect the most populated cities within Colorado to each other (and they are all basically in a straight line from north to south :D).

[@AtulKedia]

Yes, but that'll have to wait until either CAHSR or TexHSR.

[@toniderdon]

The Algo is goated for promoting your first video already. Earned yourself a new sub

[@UrbanDox]

Honestly this video just suddently blew up out of no where. Im so thankful that youtube is promoting me tho! Thanks for watching!

[@leechristmas9770]

Another area that I think would be perfect for a high speed corridor is the five cities just east of the Rocky Mountains. Cheyenne, Fort Collins, Denver, Colorado Springs, and Pueblo. All of these cities are nearly in a perfect straight line and like you said, if a corridor existed it would massively reduce the number of cars on the road for that beautiful part of our nation.

[@highway2heaven91]

Yes, this right here! I haven’t been there in a number of years but I remember that I-25 is usually packed during rush hour and evenings between Denver and Fort Collins. Also many people from Colorado Springs and Cheyenne fly out of DIA. A high speed rail line would really benefit this area.

[@connorhalleck2895]

this ending got me emotional. as an angeleno who (rationally) fears the dangers of driving, i would love to see better trains on the west coast. it's taking too long, hopefully the growing movement can speed it up.

[@MartinHoeckerMartinez]

This is a good video. The Cascade, Florida, Texas, corridors are actually pretty weak in terms of population served. The Canada/United States link you propose is probably a good idea. There are a lot of really good corridors in the triangle between Chicago, Washington DC and Boston. There's also something to be said for Raleigh to Atlanta, and you are right that California HSR is a good idea, in particular the line from Sacramento to Los Angeles.

[@danz1182]

You might want to check the population figures for those corridors. Besides which, population is not the right measure, its demand for travel and whether rail is competitive along the route with more convenient auto and faster flying. The Florida corridor is pretty perfect because of the demand for travel between its hubs. Miami is a long drive from Tampa or Orlando, but a short enough trip that a train beats a plane hands down. It is also great for tourists which is a huge multiplier for demand. Its really ideal.

[@MartinHoeckerMartinez]

@@danz1182 I used census data for populations of metropolitan statistical areas. I was surprised about just how many people there are in the Midwest (and to a lesser extent in the central valley of California) who live close enough together for rail travel to make sense. It's embarrassing that we don't have good rail in the Midwest.

[@pacificostudios]

The obvious "Next NEC" already exists: The LOSSAN corridor shared by Amtrak California (CalTrans in disguise), Metrolink, and Coaster. We have half-hourly service through much of the day between Oceanside and San Diego, and it makes travel from my house in O-Side to S.D. easy. I use it a lot.

[@samtrak1204]

Your enthusiasm is contagious!

[@toniderdon]

You sound really young but your video quality looks like you have been doing this for 5+ years easily

[@gim-bp6fu]

bro you've got a bright future ahead of you with this quality and sense of humour

[@jwrailve3615]

Texas triangle, Vegas to Cali, SLC-Denver all need high speed passenger lines

[@Akhiii_]

On the money! Coming from a Michigan Resident, we desperately need a great train service in the midwest. The wolverine is nice but not run enough! Even Chicago to Detroit would be huge and throw Ann Arbor in there. This at the core leading to further expansion all the way to Toronto and beyond would be great. Not to mention the routes that could stem below throughout the rest of the midwest. Putting down these improved and expanded rail lines would induce so much demand, hopefully I will be able to witness more rail reliance.

[@ZachValkyrie]

The fact that each and every one of these is not already online and operating at full capacity is an indictment of the state of infrastructure in this country.

[@maryland7586]

Good video, however I feel like your idea for Florida could continue along up to Jacksonville/Savannah, which then allows it to be connected to the northeast (assuming there's a way to get through VA/NC without going through marsh) which would have the amazing benefit of uniting the entire east coast from boston to miami

[@Joesolo13]

Georgia has a rather large advantage of having a lot of very rural land, a Atlanta>Jacksonville(with maybe 1 stop in Macon) could be built without having to avoid much, so it could be extremely straight and runn at top speed most of the way. If built right,

[@gumbyshrimp2606]

Lincoln to Omaha to Chicago should be the first new trial built

[@darthmaul216]

Right now cascadia is in the planning stage

[@WhitlSam]

Currently TRE connects downtown Dallas and Fort Worth. There are also regional rails from both cities to DFW, but that FT. Worth side's service (TexRail) is limited to just the one line and infrequent headways.

[@EnjoyFirefighting]

I think not only building new corridors is important, but also upgrading existing lines and services. No need to connect several places by HSR when you can get around on a local / regional basis then. While HSR is a nice and for sure effective way to move from city to city, the masses of people would commuter on a more local basis and take offered train services if they're good, cheap, fast and frequent enough. Take a look at the stats of Munich Central Station in Germany: each day there are "only" 258 long distance high speed trains , 597 regional and regional express trains, and 1,018 commuter trains. Even though there's a high ridership on high speed trains, the masses are transported by commuter trains, and then regional and regional express trains. With commuter trains running on up to a 2 minute schedule on the downtown commuter rail corridor during rush hour, they have a potential passenger capacity of close to 50,000 passengers per hour per direction. A rail line always gives the opportunity to not only connect 2 cities, but also serve the entire area in between. Again an example from Germany. Two cities, approximately 1 hour apart. The main line has 2 tracks which are used by anything from freight trains to commuter, regional and international high speed trains. The high speed train connects both city's central stations without stopping in between The next lower category, but still high speed train stops only once, at the largest town half-way in between both cities The regional express train stops 3 times in between, also at smaller towns/larger villages The regional train stops at every single of the 20 stations along the track. Thus, people living somewhere in the rural area in between both cities can benefit from the rail line and have a rail connection which takes them to high speed rail for long distance travels as well

[@TheWolfHowling]

If talking about combined US/Canada Corridors, I would love to see the construction of a railway between Vancouver, BC and Anchorage/Fairbanks, Alaska. AFAIK, The current AKRR network completely isolated from the rest of the North American Network. Alaskan travelling to the lower 48 must either fly, drive 2 days or multiple days on the Alaska Marine Highway ferry

[@pacificostudios]

When HSR opens between Bakersfield and Merced, NorCal to SoCal transportation will be revolutionized. CHSRA plans to increase the number of runs into SoCal from 12 to 18 a day. That's happening by 2030.

[@cliffwoodbury5319]

Bright-Line should build a triangle with a route as the crow flies from Miami/Tampa. It would actually be 2 triangle as a small one would split to go to Orlando!

[@lopoa126]

The Cascade Corridor would be great. Have a more local line in Oregon following 99W from the Portland stopping in Tigard, Newberg, McMinnville Monmouth and Corvallis. If it went down to Eugene (or just up to Salem) it could run with I-5 along the corridor route to connect with Salem, Woodburn, Wilsonville and Tualatin. Plenty of colleges in these towns too.

[@charlo90952]

They should have had the Chinese build the California project. They've built thousands of miles of HSR in extremely difficult terrain in the time California has been futzing about with this relatively simple project. The new Chinese line currently under construction through the Himalayas to Tibet has 500 miles of tunnels over 10,000 ft. above sea level.

[@andrewhurricane]

Two points: Brightline finished the entirety of its Orlando project in less than the time it took Amtrak to get 28 Alstom trainsets built. Privately run infrastructure works. Secondly, you left Laredo out of the Texas corridor. There are dozens of buses a day heading south on I-35 going toward the border crossing. High speed rail could easily connect with those buses in Laredo.

[@EnjoyFirefighting]

"Privately run infrastructure works" well got to mention: when you build it cheap and keep it basic, not lifting it onto better, higher, safer standards, then it's of course easier to finance and build it ... Just look at all the level crossings on Brightline's rail ...

[@DosAussieThai]

Keep up the good work.

[@jonathanleonard1152]

Brightline will not invest in separation of modes at rail crossings. This has lead to many deaths. If forced to they will probably pull out of the service due to the cost. In NYS Amtrak Empire Service provides: Twelve daily round trips (Albany-NYC) Three daily round trips (Niagara Falls-NYC)

[@ianweniger6620]

Hello, Canadian here... Quebec-Chicago? Hmmm...we're used to hearing "Windsor-Quebec Corridor" when discussing HSR. I always thought a Montreal-NYC HSR line would come first but maybe the rights-of-way for long fast stretches are hard to come by. An already-existing passenger corridor from the mouth of the St Lawrence to the shores of Lake Michigan might be a better bet. Meanwhile... VIA just got some 200km'h Siemens Venture trainsets, based on the successful OBB Viaggo in Austria. And VIA is also getting some track upgrades on straight sections so the Ventures can hit their new max of....160km/h. Also... super appreciate your takedown of Brightline. I heard they were a development operation: buy up land along a right-of-way, then build profitable condos and related services on top or surrounding stations. Now they're owned by a Japanese entity? Hope they have some ties to JR HSR technology when the death toll at level crossings is an obstacle to increased service, even for President Desantis. I'm curious why you didn't consider a southeast HSR line: Indianapolis/Louisville/Nashville/Chattanooga/Atlanta Another railchannel proposed this route. The proposal also suggested stops in Bowling Green, Murfreesboro and a couple others to make up for a desperate lack of local commuter rail in and around Appalachia. Maybe it doesn't have the GDP of Cascadia or East Texas but it has the population. OK, thanks for your video!

[@scenicdepictionsofchicagolife]

Cascades high speed rail joining up to California high speed rail seems like a no brainer to me that no one seems to be talking about. Part of the appeal of HSR is it being the alternative travel option to planes and cars. The easy networking is a big advantage it has and one that should be exploited.

[@maas1208]

I Think the midwest would be good

[@marcgrafgregorio8751]

Great vid! Looking forward for more of your vids

[@garrettclark6351]

Great video, I enjoyed the graphics and analysis. In the future, consider either skipping the fun buzzer noise or doing so less loudly (either at recording or in post-processing). Looking forward to future content!

[@cliffwoodbury5319]

Cities being to far apart is all relative to individuals and of course deal with speed and distance, but being that much higher speeds allow cities of much farther apart to be just as appealing the U.S. should strive for 250 m.p.h. railway capable infrastructure and trains because at those speeds no cities are to far away from each other and a nation wide high-speed rail network can be built and be profitable. This is the highest speed at the present time as far as high-speed rail is concerned around the world, and this nation shouldn't strive for less. At those speeds it makes trains a viable business option to planes for next day schedules with only emergency of the same day leaving planes as the only option.

[@rogertull8888]

THE CHICAGO TO QUEBEC CITY TRAIN LINE WILL NEED TO BE, EITHER THE PASSENGER TRAINS HAVE RIGHT OF WAY OR YOU HAVE TO HAVE A SEPARATE PASSENGER AND SEPARATE FREIGHT LINE

[@neutrino78x]

7:28 you keep talking about places that have "seven million people" and ignore that the area you drew is huge. Meaning the population density just isn't there. HSR needs two things, ok. -high population density at Point A and Point B. -short distance between A and B. So basically the NEC is the most viable place for trains, that's why Amtrak makes a profit there. And there is in fact an HSR capable train there (although it's not clear if it will ever be practical for it to average HSR speeds). We use lots of trains here in the Bay Area too; I don't even know how to drive. But the distance between SF, Oakland, and San Jose is only about 50-60 miles each (you can draw a triangle connecting the three), so HSR would still be a huge waste of money. I do support "higher speed rail" which means you improve existing rail transit. Adding some passing rail, straightening out some sections, eliminating stops. What you don't do is buy new RoW or lay down special track for 200+ mph or hang a wire. All those things are huge wastes of money in North America and Australia. I notice you're not shitting on Canada and Australia, though they don't use HSR either, and it's for the same reason as us: not enough population density, and distance between cities is too great.

[@mattbosley3531]

America can do anything if there's enough demand. However, these days, it's practically impossible to get the money and political backing to do much of anything, particularly when the rich have so much influence and most have little interest in passenger rail.

[@sanchorim8014]

Brightlinedoes share its ROW in South Florida with commuter train Tri-Rail, and will also work with Sunrail in Orlando. I think they would work with Amtrak if Amtrak brought something to the table, such as corridor service to the East Coast that connects with Brightline's service.

[@kitchin2]

BL does not currently share corridor with any other passenger service, but may in the future. Tri-rail is inland and not connected, though it will soon connect at the terminus in Miami. Using and extending BL tracks for commuter services Sunrail and Tri-rail is under discussion.

[@jfp3earth357]

I hope that one day hyperloop will replace airplanes and trains can replace cars and trucks

[@nwsportstilidie]

Not to mention airplanes have only one non-emergency exit. Trains have many exits. So boarding and disembarking is much faster.

[@EnjoyFirefighting]

uhm planes have 4 ...? 1 front left, 1 front right, 1 rear left and 1 rear right? Trains have more doors ... at least longer trains do

[@bristwenty]

Need to fix the audio in the start where you have music playing. Can not hear the narration the music drowns it out.

[@LoneWolf1493]

You lost me roughly 6 minutes in when you suggested that the government could manage something better than a private company could 😂

[@neutrino78x]

14:50 No, dude, that's not what happened. What happened was that in the 70s you got to the point where most people could afford a car and most people could afford to fly in jet aircraft. Rail become obsolete in North America and Australia as a result.

[@aoilpe]

If there was a HSL , it would be great, but with less than 50 miles of “real” high speed it’s just a shame for the USA…

[@DS.J]

It's baffling that anyone even mentions "profitability" of passenger trains. How much profit is that freeway nearby bringing? Or the interstates?

[@EnjoyFirefighting]

only the same profit which is generated by businesses moving freight ... and in the same way moving people which get to work and by that generate profit, passenger rail lines don't have to be profitable themselves but they help generate profit elsewhere

[@fr3dr02]

And septa in Philadelphia

[@gavinsheridan4680]

You should have a 2nd channel called ERRRRHGGH WRONG AGAIN.

[@brooklynbri7572]

Metro North & LIRR are in NY. Not NJ Transit! 😂

[@HiltonDriver-s5x]

You already have another northeast corridor which amtrak forgot the former central railroad of newjersey the reading what was called the alphabet route all it needs is founding the tracks still exist

[@wermaus]

dang no Denver :0

[@brucehain]

Governments, and particularly political appointees, aren't good at organizing construction of passenger rail projects, because they lack the knowledge (and to a lesser degree expertise) needed to conduct oversight of an industry inimical to their aims. That industry would include both the US rail industry - which has been run like a racket since 1945 - and the civil/railroad-engineering industry - which grew directly out of the US rail industry, and has participated in racketeering against the fiduciaries, both before and after 1945. A quick example is CAHSR, with the wrong choice or routing throughout almost its entire length. Now built, the short segment in the Central Valley, with its intrusive and expensive elevated alignment, will be used to replace an underused but superior line that already exists, which is more direct and shorter, and has large, commodious stations that are centrally located in towns along the way. Worse, going towards LA is planned a circuitous dogleg with 56 individual tunnel-building project needed to reach completion.

[@dasemicolon627]

this was the best routing, because otherwise they would have spent $100 billion or more just tunneling through mountains

[@brucehain]

@@dasemicolon627 That's what they're doing with the Tehachapi "Upgrade". How long do you think it will take them to build 56 separate tunnels? 75 miles of tunneling. It's the wrong route, expensive to maintain because of all the HS curves, though not particularly short or fast, also extreme needless difference in grade/elevations.The northern crossing (mountain division) is wrong too. It's one long, straight tunnel at Altamont. Adds extra CV city but yet 20 mi. shorter.

[@dasemicolon627]

@@brucehain doing 56 separate tunnels is probably easier than going through the south, given they can put tbms through each end, which is far cheaper

[@brucehain]

@@dasemicolon627 No, they won't buy or rent 112 TBMs. They will do 1 tunnel, generally from both ends, then disassemble, pick up and move the operation to the next project. They might do as many as 4 at a time (that's 8 TBMs) but it's not in their racketeering character to do more than that. The route should go through Santa Clarita. That's the correct route. It's not a matter of taste. I'm not going to enumerate reasons.

[@dasemicolon627]

@@brucehain yeah, 1 at each end, will take significantly less time to do that instead of a bunch of really long tunnels through the mountains. It took Switzerland many many years of tunneling to do their mountain trains, and they have experience doing that.

[@nathanlandoch8037]

please balance your audio, otherwise good bideo

[@Da__goat]

If they can do it without my tax money then sure. If they need my tax money, I’ll pass

[@Staniel_]

North Western infrastructure is becoming so dated it’s hard to imagine then dumping any money into transportation

[@morganboutwell8231]

Nationalize rail

[@stanhry]

1:16 only idiots go to airport two hours early.

[@Jim-Tuner]

The video deals too much in "build it and they will come" logic. If you take a look at short-hop air travel volumes nationally, the places to build HSR become really obvious. Trying to replicate the northeast corridor in other parts of the country is not a good approach either. The need is to solve transportation problems in particular areas rather than to assume that a system in one place can be repilicated in other.

[@nedludd7622]

Well, you asked for feedback, so don't get this wrong, it is meant to lead to improvement. First, you should change your delivery to be more engaging. Try to lower your tone and drop the satiric asides. Get some feedback from people you know. Second, avoid popular trends such as pronouncing the "t" in "often", how do you pronounce "soften"?😮

[@Sacto1654]

The Dallas-San Antonio-Houston "triangle" will be the next high-speed rail corridors in the USA. Major reason: construction cost will be relatively low because you don't have to deal with the *VERY* expensive tunneling and earthquake mitigation work, a huge problem for the California HSR corridor.

[@gabingston3430]

Rural NIMBYs will prevent that from happening. I wouldn't bet my money on Texas Central ever opening.

[@ByzantineCalvinist]

The South Shore Line is a holdover from the old interurban era of a century ago. It would be amazing to see it become part of a 21st-century rail transportation corridor.

[@Train_Chaser-KeiTruckUrbanist]

Fun fact: Go transit owns 2% of the track that Via rail runs on, while Via owns 3%. Mind you Via runs through the entire country

[@Joesolo13]

Love your username, It describes me a little too well. I want trains, density, *and* a early 90s Suzuki Carry

[@Train_Chaser-KeiTruckUrbanist]

Wait whycdix i comment this bru

[@CreatorPolar]

Then again via rail outside the corridor is just land cruises and essential rural services so they don’t care if they get delayed. It’s really disappointing that they have no expansion plans and that they wanna do stupid stuff like sell the corridor to a private company

[@karihartikainen2147]

they aren't looking at selling. what you are likely refering to is the High Frequency Train (HFT) ​plan as they looking at having a private partner build and operate it, with ownership by the government still. moot point as the HFT plan is on a entirely new corrider (old Peterborough/havelock spur mainly), that VIA does not even currently operate on@@CreatorPolar

[@therailcinema]

Great video! As someone who grew up in Michigan and now lives in Toronto, it was great to see you mention the idea of HSR between Ontario and Michigan. I hope at the very minimum we can see a return of a train or 2 per day using the existing infrastructure to make life easier. Interestingly, CP has expressed support for Amtrak/Via Rail to use their tunnel between Detroit and Windsor. Additionally, Ford has been rebuilding the Michigan Central Station in Detroit and plans to rebuild several platforms which could support this service. I think its very possible a service could be up and running between Chicago and Toronto in the next 10 years.

[@ednorton47]

There was a daily Amtrak train for many years between Chicago and Toronto via Port Huron. However, after 9/11, US Customs and Immigration wrecked the schedule for that route by creating endless delays in Port Huron instead of boarding the train in Ontario and carrying out their inspections while the train was underway. Amtrak had to eventually permanently discontinue that route.

[@johnchambers8528]

You made some good points on expanding regional rail lines. However I feel we should concentrate on improving service over existing routes. Such as raising the speed over existing lines to approx. 125 MPH by adding additional track, removing grade crossings where possible, and improving curves where possible. This will cost much less than true high speed trains but still be competitive with driving a car on congested highways or the long wait times added for short haul flying. The operating and maintenance costs will also be lower thus making it possible to charge lower fares. So this should make these future more successful.

[@snoopyloopy]

This is a fine strategy for lines that don't need (or can't support) a lot of work e.g. LOSSAN, but anywhere that needs a decent level of alignment work might as well go for 180+ MPH as much as feasible.

[@goldenstarmusic1689]

Existing corridors, where possible, should totally get the 90-125mph treatment, and improve frequency on the lines. It would cut travel times down by a lot and get a lot more ridership on existing lines with huge potential!

[@qjtvaddict]

@@goldenstarmusic1689 for local services

[@SlavBoyNick]

Honestly the southeast rlly needs to be connected, like metro ATL has a population of 6+ million and only has one train a day at 11:30pm

[@jonathansalek4093]

I agree.

[@fjp3305]

The main obstacle for the HSR in the US is that there are too many lawyers fighting against it.

[@Santiago-in1xf]

We already have a "mini Northeast Corridor" route, the Capitol Corridor in Northern California. It runs from San Jose to Sacramento with links to San Francisco (via Oakland and Emeryville) and Amtrak thruway service to points south and west. It has 9 roundtrips a day, many use it for commuting and it had ridership of 674,039 in FY22. The Capitol Corridor gives a taste of what CA HSR could be.

[@metrocityrr]

All it needs to jump start HSR is electrification

[@davidjackson7281]

Sorry but the 168 mile Capitol Corridor's pathetic amount of daily ridership is 2,000 or 100 per whole train the whole route. SMART is only 45 miles and it has 2,500 daily riders. Forget electricity. Upgrade the tracks to 110 mph (some 125 mph) and use trainsets like Brightline that are faster. Have atleast one express train.

[@lamegaming9835]

the next NEC is obviously sf to la. theres enough population and frequency to give the nec a run for its money. especially with the calmod and metrolink (or whatever the la region commuter rail is called) updates edit: for florida to be anywhere successful, they must reduce at grade crossings to increase speeds

[@scrat4379]

That would be a challenge to build below grade road underpasses in Florida with the high water table down there.

[@lamegaming9835]

@@scrat4379 then build above grade?

[@scrat4379]

@Lame Gaming If it works sure. I mention below grade road under passes as it would keep the track bed level to allow trains to maintain a constant speed.

[@Train_Chaser-KeiTruckUrbanist]

>2,200 trains per day. Meanwhile Canada with 6 trains a day between their biggest cities

[@timothyjohnston4083]

You misunderstood what he said. Those 2200 trains per day in the Northeast Corridor (NEC) include those run by Amtrak AS WELL AS local and regional public transit authorities combined. If you included all the local transit trains -- GO Transit, AMT, OC Transpo, TTC, etc. -- there are far more than the "6 trains a day" that you claim. In fact, on some lines GO Transit alone operates 6 trains an hour.

[@CrazyDash9]

Great video! Another potential candidate for a corridor would be the Pacific Surfliner. I feel like it is being heavily underutilized with Amtrak only having 10 round trips from LA-SD, 3 round trips from LA-GO, and 2 round trips from LA-SLO. There’s also Metrolink and Coaster that serve parts of the Surfliner but also have super low frequencies. This corridor has endless potential to be a major corridor that could carry millions of people per year. On the bright side, upgrades are being done to the LA-SD section that includes double tracking most of the line and I believe some speed improvements? Now this is great and all, but I think they should do more. Coaster is definitely going to benefit from double tracking so I won’t talk about it. Metrolink badly needs to increase frequencies on all of their lines since they have some of the worst frequencies in the country. Here in Ventura County we only get 3 trains per day which is really bad. We need much more. Luckily it seems Metrolink does plan to do this for some lines, but not the Ventura County Line which baffles me. California HSR will also be running on the route for a small part of the Surfliner, so electrification of the entire Surfliner system is possible. This may be a controversial opinion, but I dislike the route the HSR takes from LA-SD. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be a line to SD via Riverside, but I don’t think HSR works for that kind of line. I think an intercity service would be much better. I think CAHSR should run on the entire line to SD. Not only would it reduce costs, but it would take a much more direct route than the proposed one, and it would give Amtrak some competition which would be great since tickets are pretty expensive at the moment. Although trains would be restricted to 110mph due to grade crossings, some parts of the route have no grade crossings allowing for higher speeds. I could see CAHSR going between LA and SD in 2hrs or less if done well. I think doing all these things would greatly benefit transportation in California and make for a great passenger corridor. Sorry I wrote a full on essay lol

[@petethetraveler]

You don’t think the Surfliner is already a corridor route similar to the NEC? As you said it has 10 trains round trip per day and has 2 different commuter rail lines operating on frequent schedules. Obviously the section north of LA is a little underserved, but it still is pretty decent, arguably decent enough that it still is a corridor route, though not like the NEC. As for the CAHSR I would imagine that they are prioritizing cost by going inland through Riverside and the Temecula area, and preventing against extremely large delays and cancellations due to the unlikely weather of California’s coast.

[@CrazyDash9]

@@petethetraveler it definitely is a corridor. But it’s obviously nowhere on the same level as the NEC since lots of the line is still single tracked. Obviously the line south is being double tracked for the most part, but the NEC still sees significantly more trains and is primarily triple tracked and quadruple tracked in other areas. I guess my definition of a corridor was not appropriate in my comment. What I meant to say is to get it onto a similar level as the NEC in terms of business and whatnot. Sorry for the confusion

[@petethetraveler]

@@CrazyDash9 I definitely agree and thank you for the clarification. I totally agree that the Surfliner’s route is different from the NEC, most notably in geography.

[@jonathanstensberg]

Idea: a new high speed line across southern Pennsylvania, directly connecting the two most populous regions of the country by the shortest and fastest route. Eastern branches would connect to Washington, Baltimore, and via Harrisburg to Philadelphia and New York. Western branches via Pittsburgh would connect to Cleveland and Columbus, fanning out through the Midwest to Detroit and Chicago in the north, Indianapolis and St Louis in the middle, and Cincinnati and Louisville in the south. The key to the whole thing is a straight Shot across southern Pennsylvania.

[@cxsey8587]

City nerd has a video on this, it’s an okay route but it’s not great

[@jonathanstensberg]

@@cxsey8587 City Nerd considers almost exclusively city pairs. It's a helpful metric in many circumstances, but it's almost useless when considering a trans-appalachian route. Every train between the midwest and northeast would be funnelled onto a single mainline, making it much more valuable than the sum of its city pairs.

[@edwardmiessner6502]

Excellent video! Another good idea is to connect Boston to Toronto and Chicago by way of Albany and Buffalo with alternate routes to Chicago going through Detroit and Cleveland, revitalizing plenty of smaller cities along the way. A third alternate would go through Lansing and Grand Rapids.

[@andrew_ray]

Also Boston to Montreal via Lowell, Nashua, Manchester, Concord, and Burlington/Essex.

[@yaki_huevo]

great video. really excited to see more in the future

[@UrbanDox]

Thanks for watching!

[@ac.erzengel]

conservative here, don't believe in climate change but definitely still believe that car dependency is killing our cities and that trains are amazing

[@DENVERRIOGRANDEMAN21]

I agree as well

[@FlyingOverTr0ut]

So glad to see yet another urbanist channel arrive. Subscribed, and watching from LA.

[@zachconrad525]

Dude my jaw dropped when I saw your subs, I've asspired to do content like this for a while and many times had the thought that the wave had past. Really awesome to see new creators in the Rail/Urban Design space, awesome video keep at it!

[@Alejandro-vn2si]

Please, makes more videos about California High Speed Rail and other transit project in California!

[@apollodraconis4853]

A high priority corridor for the Midwest/Great Lakes is connecting the Twin Cities to Chicago. Connect from Chicago to Milwaukee, Madison, La Crosse, Rochester, Saint Paul, and Minneapolis. Rochester itself would grow even faster than it currently is, and the travel time could be reduced from 8 hours to 3 hours or even less.

[@movethebox1503]

I think u can extend the west Coast corridor to California if done right. Surprised u didn’t mention the south East connecting DC to south Florida and even Charlotte and Atlanta, or even Richmond to Raleigh to Atlanta.

[@Indigolily80]

Sometimes, I wonder if these urbanism channels even realize that VA, NC, and SC even exist. All I hear about is California, Texas, and the northeast. VA and NC have bought the old train tracks south of Richmond. They are working on improving rail service in that region.

[@vermas4654]

Huh, i guess i found a new channel to subscribe to

[@tylerkriesel8590]

Minneapolis to Chicago would be a REALLY good line

[@banksrail]

Great video! 😁 6:16 yeah I really want to see this get built, but man does it seem like a bad investment for a private company to make (especially when the whole point is real estate)

[@toniderdon]

I'm out here patiently waiting for the Banks Rail video about Brightline West, but I know I know, CAHSR is first

[@arjunaich5399]

This video is so great! So funny yet actually proposing ideas. I accidentally refreshed KZbin but remember the title. I’d love to see you do a metro proposal where you build out an entire Rapid transit system for a city that doesn’t have one, or expand a rapid transit system like Seattle. Loved the video mate!

[@goldenstarmusic1689]

I would like to mention that the Great Lakes Corridor very much should include the portions up through Wisconsin to Minnesota and beyond! The Twin Cities - Milwaukee - Chicago corridor was one of the most frequent historical train corridors in the US with trains that ran well upwards of 100-120+ MPH multiple times a day! Nowadays, we are seeing efforts to restore frequency and speed in the TCMC corridor, as well as improving on existing lines like the Hiawatha to Milwaukee. Higher speed rail is getting planned to Duluth, restoring passenger service to the city in a better than ever package. Minnesota's state rail plan has corridors planned to improve Fargo-Moorhead frequencies, and even build an extension to Winnipeg in Canada! Hell, there's even a true high speed rail plan that is coming back to life; Rochester ZIP Rail would connect the Twin Cities to Rochester MN, beginning the start of proper electrified high speed rail that could extend to Chicago! It was banned from study by politicians in 2016, with efforts being made this year to overturn its study ban and political support for the project to come back! Minnesotans have been fighting hard lately through the legislature to get funding for these passenger rail improvements is closer than ever this year and I highly recommend you take a look into the various passenger rail plans and funding that is coming through for Minnesota, and the Upper Midwest+Great Lakes overall. We're seeing the bones getting built of the next NEC in the Midwest.

[@craigschulz2817]

HSR needs to expanded north of Milwaukee. A HSR connection from Marquette to Milwaukee would work

[@ragellejean]

Something to note about the Cascades corridor, Translink has mentioned the proposal [or at least possibility] for a high-speed rail connection into the states in their Transport 2050 plans. Fingers crossed that it comes within that timeframe!

[@erictrumpler9652]

In my opinion, what is necessary is to initiate a star-shaped network of high-speed rail lines emanating from Chicago, using the French or Spanish systems based in Paris and Madrid as an example. 1. A line to Detroit and onward to Canada's major cities, and a branch to Cleveland, Pittsburgh and points east. 2. A major line to Atlanta via Indianapolis and Nashville. 3. Dallas via St Louis, connecting to other projects in Texas, and maybe a branch to Memphis and New Orleans. 4. Denver, via Davenport and Kansas City or Omaha 5. Minneapolis and Winnipeg. The point being, that all of these lines cover connections that could easily replace highway and and short-haul air travel...All the projects detailed here are corridors in the populous coastal regions of the US... certainly necessary and perhaps more profitable, but a unified high-speed rail system needs to have its hub at a centrally located population center. Atlanta could be another such hub.

[@josephpadula2283]

If it was not for private companies there would not be a NE Corregidor ! Amtrack maintains a system stockholders built. Then Government roads and airports put passenger rail out of business .

[@michaelphillips2079]

"Progressive". Ya'll keep saying that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

[@JRNY07]

We need new high speed train for Chicago - Pittsburgh - DC; replacing the far-too-slow Capital Limited.

[@thekinglkatana9782]

Not to be rude or anyting but you forgot about SEPTA and MTA they do commuter rail as well

[@dasoffendor]

You'll be pleased to know that Amtrak was granted access to the Detroit-Windsor tunnel as part of the Canadian Pacific-Kansas City Southern merger which was just completed.

[@RyanKusuma]

LA to San Bernardino LA to San Diego These two are a missed gold mine

[@TVLRX]

You got a new fan!

[@FalconsEye58094]

I think another great one would be connecting several other cities in New York and Canada. There's ideas for an Empire corridor but electrifying all routes and optimizing them would be a massive upgrade. New Yorkers, myself included would love it to be realistic to take a weekend/business trip to Toronto or Montreal

[@purple1402]

What about the MTA and SEPTA?

[@mastertrams]

Transport Planning student here... It is worth noting that transport is a derived demand, meaning transport, especially railways, are heavily tied to land use planning. So, while building these corridors might be a good idea (and trust me, it is a good idea), it will be of zero value unless you also sort out land use. No more of this single-family housing. Not in the quantities you have it, at least. Also, transport planning transcends where the infrastructure and corridors go. It is about shaping the society you want to live in. Who do you want to get where? Where are you going to put barriers? Where are you going to put connections? The places transport gives you access to directly impact on your quality of life, so as I said, transport planning transcends planning the infrastructure, it is about planning the society we want to live in.

[@deanchapman1824]

Forgot Metro North into Connecticut.

[@alcubierrevj]

Opening scene: New Brunswick, NJ

[@appliedengineering4001]

One of the biggest problem with getting HS rail going in North America is that you can't run HS trains on the existing freight rails. HS rails have to light, bouncy and have non-sharp turns that are banked. Plus, most passenger trains are electric powered and need that overhead catenary wire to power them. Freight rails on the other hand are hard, rigid and have sharp turns with no banking in them. A North American freight train is 5 time heavier the a European one. Plus, North American freight trains have higher priority over passenger trains, were as over in Europe, it's the opposite.

[@EnjoyFirefighting]

electrification would be one step; Even some freight rail lines in Europe did so more than a century ago because it was profitable. Apart from that many lines across Europe are mixed use by both freight trains, local and long distance high speed trains

[@weirdfish1216]

amazing video and editing. i agreed with you on practically everything. excited to see your channel grow!